|
|
 |
| |
Geography all wrong for school plan
•
EVERY week seems to bring more evidence that Councillor Andrew Mennear and his Tory and Lib Dem colleagues are on the wrong track in trying to shoehorn a large Trust School on to the site of the Frank Barnes School in Swiss Cottage.
Camden’s teachers are against the proposals, parents are against them, and, following last week’s news from Haringey, it seems that the Office of the Schools Adjudicator may well come out against them too.
Camden Greens are opposed to Cllr Mennear’s proposals for six main reasons.
The proposed location in Swiss Cottage is short-sighted and badly thought out when it is anticipated that the most severe shortage of school places will be in the south of the borough, considering existing demand and new developments including King’s Cross. The decision as to the location should be based on a detailed survey of need with adequate consideration given to the location of existing schools and the new schools being built in neighbouring boroughs – Islington and Brent are both planning on building new schools and Westminster will be opening three academies. This is a hugely expensive project for the taxpayer and we do not want more spaces than we need in the wrong area.
It is quite wrong to try and squeeze a secondary school for 1,200 children, plus a special school, on to the site of the Frank Barnes School. Kids need space to play and grow.
It would be better to have two smaller secondary schools, which would give parents more local choice and which would boost the local community rather than requiring children to travel long distances.
It is unacceptable to give the valuable work of the Frank Barnes School for the Deaf and the community they serve so little recognition, asking it to relocate without a guarantee of another appropriate site.
Opting for a Trust School would mean giving the school(s) more power in terms of admissions. The right of some schools to select a proportion of students by ‘aptitude’ will inevitably leave those schools that are unable to select as the sink schools.
We are opposed to the bids of both the Church of England and UCL to be ‘sponsors’. Camden is a multi-faith society with many people of no religion and many who do not belong to the Christian faith. It is unfair to treat them less favourably by allowing selective church schools. UCL is a very good university but has absolutely no experience of organising the secondary education of inner city – it should stick to what it knows.
Our schools should be community schools bringing parents and children together and thus strengthening our local communities. Local people are also entitled to expect value for money and not have the burden of huge costs which have to be paid for many years – that is the legacy of PFI projects in education and the NHS and we must avoid ending up in the same poor financial situation with our schools.
Local participation through governing bodies and other groups should be strengthened and buildings used for other community services such as adult education – something which has proved impossible in many schools built and run by PFI firms.
Cllr MAYA DE SOUZA (Green Party)
Highgate Ward
• I HAVE just come back from the West Hampstead meeting to consider the Camden Building Schools for the Future proposals.
It struck me that it is time that we move on in the discussions surrounding a new secondary school in the borough.
Whilst we all feel for the decades of under-provision in the area south of the Euston Road, the council made it very clear that if there were an option to build a school there then they would. Nevertheless, they assured us that they would continue to push the government to do something about it.
Since we are now confronted almost inevitably with a new school in the centre of the borough, I think that we should urgently focus the debate on what this school will be like, and how it will be run.
The questions the councillors have presented at the three open meetings have tried to push us in that direction. If we don’t voice our views before the end of the month then the council will not consider them as they make an ‘indicative decision’ in regard to who runs the school, its ethos and values, its breadth of curriculum, and its place in the community.
I was pleased to see the council outline their requirements for this new school. I feel that our best hope of seeing them fulfilled is to have an open and fair competition. I would like to see a Church of England secondary school, with an open admissions policy, built in Camden. They have a proven track record, plenty of support in the borough and will ably deliver on all of the council’s requirements.
Some of your readers may disagree with me, but now is the time to voice our opinions to the council and urge them to consider them all openly and fairly.
ADRIAN BARRETT
Kingdon Road, NW6
• CAMDEN'S BSF consultation meeting on Tuesday evening was a total farce. It was derailed by those wanting to talk about the location of the school and the future of the special schools.
These are obviously vital issues and do warrant discussion, but there was no opportunity at the meeting to discuss the issue that the silent majority were there to discuss: the character of the new secondary school.
One-third of Camden’s primary schools are C of E schools. I am a governor at one of them. These schools are, on average, more popular with parents than other types of primary schools in Camden, yet there is not one secondary school in the borough that offers this same popular ethos and character. It’s time to redress the balance.
LUCY O'GILVIE
Hollycroft Ave, NW3
|
 |
|
| |
|
|
|
